Los Angeles River Master Plan Update

448 S. Hill St. 5900 Wilshire Blvd Suite 1008 Suite 401 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Los Angeles, CA 90036 310.957.6100 323.387.3598 www.geosyntec.com www.theolinstudio.com

PROGRESS MEMORANDUM

TO: Carolina Hernandez, P.E., Los Angeles County Public Works

PROJECT: Los Angeles River Master Plan Update

TASK NUMBER: 3.5

SUBJECT: Existing Ecosystem and Habitat Conditions

SUBMITTED BY: Jessica M. Henson, RLA, ASLA, OLIN Mark Hanna, Ph.D., P.E., Geosyntec Nate Wooten, RA, AIA, ASLA, OLIN

DATE: 19 November 2018

MEMO NUMBER: 3.5-4

The following Progress Memorandum summarizes the significant findings for Los Angeles River Master Plan Update Task 3.5 related to existing ecosystem and habitat conditions.

Executive Summary Despite being highly urbanized, the Los Angeles River watershed sits within one of the world’s most diverse Mediterranean biodiversity hotspots. Historically, the river has been both periodically dry and, at times, prone to severe flooding.1 The river drains the Los Angeles Plain and was habitat and a water source for numerous endemic plants and animals, as well as migratory birds.2

The river as an ecosystem has been altered from its historic state, first through agriculture and irrigation and later through channelization efforts dating back as early as 1914.3 While a comprehensive study of historical conditions has not yet been completed for the LA River, historic maps of the region along with studies done for nearby waterways indicate that the historic flora and fauna of the LA River were likely a mix of coastal sage scrub and valley grasslands, with swaths of Southern California oak and walnut forests as the river approached the Santa Monica Mountains.4

In addition to alterations due to channelization and rapid urbanization over the past 150 years, anticipated changes in climate and water management in the region are likely to further alter the river

1 Blake Gumprecht, The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth, 2001, pp 9-15.

2 Kimball L. Garret, “The Biota of the Los Angeles River”, 1993, pp 2.

3 Los Angeles County Public Works, “Los Angeles River Master Plan, Appendix A: History of The Los Angeles River,” pp 311.

4 Kimball L. Garret, “The Biota of the Los Angeles River”, 1993, pp 3-10.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 2

as an ecosystem.5 Therefore, it is recommended that ecosystem enhancement balance returning lost native ecosystems with current urbanized realities, anticipated higher intensity precipitation events, and warmer average temperatures.

In addition to its Mediterranean climate, the ecology of the LA River is informed by the surrounding landforms and underlying geology. The San Gabriel, Santa Monica, and Santa Susana Mountains are among the fastest growing mountains in the world, ascending at rates averaging two inches per year.6 Historically, as the mountains eroded, alluvial sediments were deposited throughout the Los Angeles Basin, which, over time, formed the soils of the Los Angeles Plain. Flooding would continually enrich these sediments producing a verdant valley of wildflowers, grasses, forbs, and shrubs that attracted pronghorn antelope, rabbits, ground squirrels, pocket gophers, and grizzly bears.7 Following settlement by the Spanish, scrub and grassland areas were overgrazed, converted to agriculture, and eventually covered over as the city expanded.8 More recently, flood management has further altered these geomorphological processes. However, the highly permeable sediments and soils beneath Los Angeles remain critical in maintaining the groundwater basins that underlay the Los Angeles Plain.

Today, the entire 51-mile river is designated as warm freshwater habitat, while the upper portion of the river and the mouth are designated as wildlife habitat.9 The mouth of the river, which is brackish and influenced by tidal waters is designated as marine habitat, used by rare, threatened, or endangered species, spawning, reproduction, and/or early development of aquatic organisms.10 It is recommended that planning and development efforts along the river consider these habitat uses and, where appropriate, seek to expand them along the entire length of the river.

The river’s capacity to support biological activity is determined by hydrological conditions, channel shape, and connectivity to adjacent biodiversity hotspots upland of the river. Much of the dry weather flow in the LA River is treated effluent from waste water reclamation facilities. In the future, some of this water may be recycled before reaching the river.11 The river channel varies between a box channel, trapezoidal channel, and a trapezoidal soft bottom channel. The 11.3 miles of soft bottom

5 Daniel L. Swain and Baird Langenbrunner, J. David Neelin, and Alex Hall, A. “Increasing precipitation volatility in twenty-first century California.” Nature Climate Change 8, 2018, pp 427–433.

6 Roy Murphy and Julia Murphy, The San Gabriel Mountains. Arcadia, CA: Big Santa Anita Historical Society, 1985.

7 Paula M. Schiffman, “The Los Angeles Prairie.” From Deverell, William and Greg Hise, Land of Sunshine: An Environmental History of Metropolitan Los Angeles, 2005, pp. 40-43.

8 Ibid.

9 Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, “Basin Plan for the Coast Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties”, 2018.

10 Ibid.

11 Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), “LA River Environmental Flows Study”, presentation 2018.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 3

reaches of the river at the Sepulveda Basin, the Glendale Narrows, and the tidal estuary contain the most biological activity; however, much of the river corridor supports algae, insects, fish, or birds.12 Currently, the soft bottom portions of the river also contain the most problematic invasive plant species, such as Arundo (Arundo donax). These invasive species outcompete native species that might otherwise flourish in the soft bottom areas.13 Historic and extant native ecosystems of coastal sage scrub (Soft Chaparral), grasslands, valley oak and walnut woodlands, and riparian forests were likely more common along the upper half of the river, while freshwater wetlands and coastal salt marsh were likely more common to the lower half of the river as it crosses the Los Angeles Plain.14 Though there are currently no US Fish and Wildlife Service critical habitat areas (defined as habitat areas that are essential to the conservation of a threatened or endangered species) along the main stem of the LA River, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) has associated over 132 rare or threatened species with the river and adjacent areas.15

The unique biodiversity of the region and its ecosystem associations should guide targets for ecosystem improvements along the river’s distinct reaches. Cataloging historic and current ecological conditions reveals gradients of symbiotic ecosystems along and perpendicular to the river that improve the region’s biodiversity. Where core habitat areas exist within the river corridor, such as parts of the soft bottom sections at the Lower Los Angeles River Shorebird Area, Glendale Narrows, and Sepulveda Basin, they should be protected, managed, and, when possible, expanded to connect with other smaller habitat areas. By enhancing and interconnecting larger habitat areas, plant and animal species endemic to the river are more likely to survive and thrive in an otherwise fragmented urban landscape.

Where it is adjacent to core habitat areas such as Griffith Park or Elysian Park, the river can act as a buffer between those core habitat areas and development. In zones where habitat linkages are missing, the river corridor could be a link for connectivity. In more highly urbanized areas where there is a lack of existing biodiversity, opportunities for the river as a habitat stepping stone should be considered. While continuous habitat areas are preferred, multiple distinct habit areas in close proximity to each other allow birds and other species to access multiple sites for finding shelter, food, and water.

12 See for example: Kimball L. Garret, “The Biota of the Los Angeles River”, 1993; FoLAR, “The First State of the Los Angeles River Report”, 2005; FoLAR, “State of the River 2 The Fish Study”, 2008; FoLAR, “State of the River 3 The Long Beach Fish Study”, 2016.

13 Los Angeles County Public Works, “Los Angeles River Master Plan: Landscaping Guidelines and Plant Palettes, 2004, pp 38.

14 Stein, E., S. Dark, T. Longcore, N. Hall, M. Beland, R. Grossinger, J. Casanova and M. Sutula, “Historical Ecology and Landscape Change of the San Gabriel River and Floodplain,” 2007, pp 61-66.

15 Species county tabulated from: California Department of Fish and Wildlife: California Natural Diversity Database, October 2016; Quads: Burbank, Canoga Park, Hollywood, Long Beach, Los Angeles, South Gate, and Van Nuys, Accessed from CNDDB QuickView, 05/19/18.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 4

The LA River watershed is a hingepoint in the California Floristic Province. The river and its watershed sit within one of the world’s most diverse Mediterranean biodiversity hotspots: the California Floristic Province. Globally, Mediterranean climate regions make up only 2% of the Earth’s land surface but contain a remarkable 20% of the world’s plant species.16 Isolated by the Pacific Ocean and the desert Southwest, the province is home to 3500 plant species, 61% of which are endemic.17 The LA River sits at one of the narrowest parts of the province and is further pinched by the development of the Los Angeles metropolitan area. At this critical point, the river could be part of a connective matrix of diverse habitats, not just for the ecological health of the watershed, but also for migratory species of the Pacific Flyway and the migration of species northward within the ecoregion.

The largely urbanized Los Angeles River watershed overlays an area called the South Coast Bioregion. Coastal wetlands, vernal pools, riparian woodlands, grasslands, and coastal sage scrub all have been reduced to a small fraction of their former land cover, and remaining communities typically are fragmented and/or degraded.18 As a result, this region has the largest number of endangered and threatened species and species of special concern in the contiguous 48 states.19 Most of these species are associated with the habitats listed above. Connected grasslands, wetlands, and riparian habitats along the LA River could have a significant impact on maintaining urban biodiversity in the region.

Today, 48 of the 51 miles of the river are within heavily developed areas. Except for Sepulveda Basin and Griffith Park, few intact natural communities of the South Coast Region remain within or adjacent to the river. However, opportunities to improve connectivity to large natural areas found in the San Gabriel, Santa Monica, and Santa Susana Mountains at the headwaters near Canoga Park, and between Griffith Park and the Verdugo Mountains at the Glendale Narrows should be bolstered to improve the resiliency of species through the urbanized region.20, 21

16 Conservation International, Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, California Floristic Province, 2018, https://www.cepf.net/our-work/biodiversity-hotspots/california-floristic-province.

17 Ibid.

18 USGS Western Ecological Research Center, Bioregions of the Pacific U.S. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/werc/science/bioregions-pacific-us?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt- science_center_objects.

19 Ibid.

20 Caltrans and CDFW, California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California, 2010.

21 US National Park Service, “Researchers Begin Monitoring LA River Wildlife Using Remote Cameras,” 2018.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 5

Figure 1: The LA River watershed is at a hingepoint in the California Floristic Province.

Historically, vegetation communities varied along the 51 miles based on variation in local hydrology, elevation, solar orientation, and soils between the headwaters and the mouth. Historic maps, historic descriptions of the region, and studies done for nearby waterways provide an indication of what historic ecologies may have existed along the LA River in the 19th-century, prior to urbanization.22 The upper river in the San Fernando Valley was likely a mix of coastal sage scrub and valley grasslands. As the river approached the north-facing slopes of the Santa Monica Mountains, it became interspersed with large stands of oak, walnut, and riparian forests of willow, sycamore, alder, and mulefat. Flowing south through the Glendale Narrows to what is now downtown Los Angeles, the introduction of year-round groundwater from the San Fernando Basin supported a more densely forested section of the river. As the river continued south across the flat Los Angeles Plain, the river spread out over a larger alluvial plain with diminishing riparian forests. Amongst the coastal sagebrush and grassland prairie, freshwater wetlands would have been common in the river’s southern reaches.

22 For a description of the Los Angeles Prairie see: Schiffman, Paula M. “The Los Angeles Prairie.” From Deverell, William and Greg Hise, Land of Sunshine: An Environmental History of Metropolitan Los Angeles, 2005, pp. 38– 51. For historic vegetation mapping see: Kuchkler, A. W. Natural Vegetation of California, 1977. For studies on nearby waterways see: Stein, ED, S Dark, T Longcore, N Hall, M Beland, R Grossinger, J Casanova, M Sutula, “Historical ecology and landscape change of the San Gabriel River and floodplain.” 2007.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 6

At the estuarine river mouth, vast coastal salt marshes would have stretched across San Pedro Bay. Though some extant habitat patches remain near the river, most of these native ecosystems were lost during the channelization of the river and conversion to agriculture and, ultimately, urbanization. A similar diversity of landscape enhancements along the river corridor could make a significant impact in reestablishing these lost ecological types to the Los Angeles area.

Figure 2: The LA River had a diversity of historic vegetation formations.

The soft bottom portions of the river contain the most invasive plant species. Giant reed (Arundo donax) is particularly aggressive and problematic as it provides little habitat or foraging for birds and other rare species common to the river, outcompetes other native rare riparian plant species, and constricts flood flows. Other invasive species common to the river channel and adjacent lands include: Jubata (Cortaderia jubata), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis), pampas (Cortaderia selloana), fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum), and a host of other ornamental, non-natives.23 Although these species still provide marginal habitat for some generalist species, the lack of native flora diminishes the role of these areas in providing habitat and foraging for other more rare species, and reduces the river’s overall value in sustaining urban biodiversity. Changes in the region’s climate and hydrology are likely

23 California Invasive Plant Council, “Invasive Plants (Species) - Central and So. Cal Coastal Watersheds [ds645],” 2010.

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 7

to further stress native plants found in and around the LA River corridor making active management of invasive species more vital.

Figure 3: Invasive species are common in the soft bottom portions of the LA River Corridor.

Conclusions The concrete channelization of the river has altered the river as a native ecosystem; yet ecology remains, adapts, and changes. With further connectivity and habitat enhancement, the river has the potential to increase urban biodiversity given the high natural biodiversity occurring nearby in the region’s large inland protected areas. Additionally, elements of the river’s former ecology can be reintroduced where appropriate to reestablish many of the rare riparian and upland ecosystems that have been lost to urbanization. It is recommended that environmental planning efforts along the river focus on creating habitat areas large enough to support native ecosystems, interconnectivity of these habitat areas, and active monitoring and management of these areas over time against the compounding stresses of urbanization, climate change, and competition from invasive species.

1. Local biodiversity hotspots and areas of existing native vegetation and habitat should be considered for protection, enhancement, expansion, and management over time. Existing scientific species inventories and more recent citizen science efforts such as iNaturalist and eBird show that, despite its urbanized state, the LA River is already playing a

Progress Memorandum to Carolina Hernandez 19 November 2018 Page 8

role in providing habitat and maintaining a variety of urban biodiversity. It is recommended that existing hot spots be enhanced and gaps in biodiversity prioritized to ensure connectivity.

2. Invasive plant management in the soft bottom portion of the river is critical for establishing and maintaining more native ecosystems. As is common in heavily urbanized and disturbed streams, invasive species outcompete many native species. This is particularly problematic in a region with such high plant endemism and a shortage of riparian and wetland habitat.

3. Gap analysis should focus on areas adjacent to core habitat areas, riparian to upland connections should be prioritized, and adjacent lands should buffer against development. The LA River passes through two significant protected areas at the Sepulveda Basin and at Griffith Park. Part of Griffith Park is near the river and is also designated a significant ecological area by the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning, meaning it has irreplaceable biological resources. Additionally, Audubon has designated the lower river an Important Bird Area (IBA) from the mouth at Long Beach up to the 105 Freeway. In these areas, improving and buffering upland and riparian connections may improve the ecological health of these protected areas and connect the river to a larger matrix of habitat areas.

4. Most planning for the river to date has prescribed a one-size-fits-all approach to vegetation planting and ecology, rather than an approach tailored to varied historic ecological conditions or projected hydrology or climate. Ecological planning and planting guidelines should aim to match the pre-urban conditions found at each river reach. However, the resilience of these native ecosystems to changes in hydrology and climate should also be considered and, where needed, historical planting palettes should be augmented and adaptively managed.

5. Gaps in information include a more comprehensive and complete inventory of current and historic biodiversity along the river. Intermittent monitoring efforts, regional scale mapping, historical accounts, and ecological studies from similar watersheds give clues as to what ecosystems and habitats are native to the LA River and are sufficient to guide future ecological planning. A detailed comprehensive historical ecology analysis has never been completed for the river. While such an analysis would provide a deeper understanding of historic river habitats, it is not necessary for planning within the urbanized context of the present-day watershed.

END OF MEMORANDUM 181119_LARMP_Task 3.5_Ecosystem & Habitat_Progress Memorandum.docx

PROGRESS

LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEMS & HABITAT LARMP TASK 3.5

19 November 2018

9 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS

Source: Flickr user Scott Lowe, Ducklings on the LA River, 2012, https://www.flickr.com/photos/scottlowe/7465161472/

10 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS

Source: Map Pixel, Usa California Landscape Los Angeles, https://www.maxpixel.net/Usa-California-Landscape-Los-Angeles-2246245

11 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE CALIFORNIA FLORISTIC PROVINCE IS 1 OF 5 OF MEDITERRANEAN GLOBAL DIVERSITY HOTSPOTS

California Floristic Province Mediterranean Basin

Cape Floristic Region Southwest Australia

Chilean Winter Rainfall-Valdivian Forests

Source: Conservation International, Biodiversity Hotspots Revisited, 2004

12 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER WATERSHED IS AT A HINGEPOINT IN THE CALIFORNIA FLORISTIC PROVINCE

Level III Ecoregions of The California Floristic Province Klamath Mountains Coastal Range Cascades LA River & South Coast Bioregion Sierra Nevada Central California Valley Central California Chaparral/Oak Woodlands Southern California Coast Southern California Mountain and Valley Pacific Flyway Marine Extent of the California Floristic Province

Source: EPA, Level II and III Ecoregions of the Continental United States, 2013 & Conservation International, Biodiversity Hotspots Revisited, 2004 & INACC, California Bioregions, 2015

13 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER WATERSHED CUTS ACROSS THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COAST ECOREGION

Level III Ecoregions of the LA River Watershed Southern California Coast 70.0% (California Coastal Sage, Chaparral, and Oak Woodlands) Southern California Mountain and Valley 30.0% (Southern and Baja California Pine-Oak Mountains) Level IV Sub-Ecoregion Boundaries Anticipated Direction of Species Movement in Response to Climate Change

Source: EPA, Level II and III Ecoregions of the Continental United States, 2013

14 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER CORRIDOR IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE LOS ANGELES PLAIN

Level IV Sub-Ecoregions of the LA River Watershed Los Angles Plain 48.5% San Gabriel Mountains 20.2% Simi Valley-Santa Susana Mountains 12.2% Upper San Gabriel Mountains 9.8% Santa Monica Mountains 9.3%

Source: EPA, Level II and III Ecoregions of the Continental United States, 2013

15 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS LARGE-SCALE HABITAT CONNECTIVITY OPPORTUNITIES EXIST AT THE EDGES OF THE LA RIVER WATERSHED Habitat Connectivity Essential Connectivity Areas California Missing Linkages Existing Wildlife Crossing Proposed Wildlife Crossing Habitat Areas Natural Landscape Blocks Small Natural Areas Wildland Urban Intermix Significant Ecological Area (SEA)

Source: CDFW and CalTrans ,California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project, 2010 & Remote Sensing Lab, Region 5, USDA Forest Service, CA:Wildland Urban Intermix, 2006 & Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Significant Ecological Areas, 2015

16 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER FLOWS Sepulveda Bsin THROUGH TWO SIGNIFICANT Griffith Park PROTECTED AREAS AND AN IMPORTANT BIRD AREA (IBA)

Protected Areas Wildland Urban Intermix Lower Los Angeles River IBA Significant Ecological Area (SEA) LA River Corridor Ecological Hotspots

Source: California Protected Areas Database (CPAD 2017), CA:Wildland Urban Intermix , Remote Sensing Lab, Region 5, USDA Forest Service 2006 & Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Significant Ecological Areas, 2015

17 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS

Source: NASA/JPL/NIMA . PIA03376: Perspective View, SRTM / Landsat, Los Angeles, Calif, 2002

18 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER DRAINS AN 834-SQUARE-MILE WATERSHED

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

19 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS SLOPES IN THE UPPER WATERSHED ARE PREDOMINANTLY ORIENTED TO THE SOUTH

Slope Aspect

North

West Flat East

South

Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 2013, USGS NED 1 arc-second 2013

20 + Mount Pacifico 7,103 ft Ecosystems & Habitat San Gabriel Mountains +Oat Mountain PROGRESS 3,747 ft THE LA RIVER San Fernando Valley +Verdugo Peak DROPS 780 FEET 3,126 ft IN JUST 51 MILES +San Vicente Peak 1,985 ft Santa Monica Mountains High (7,103 ft)

Los Angeles Plain Low (0 ft)

780772 ft ft

00 ft ft 51 FOOTHILLSFOOTHILLS 25NARROWSCANYONS 17ALLUVIALALLUVIAL PLAIN PLAIN4MOUTH MOUTH 0

Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 2013, USGS NED 1 arc-second 2013

21 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS GENERALLY, LA RIVER GEOLOGY IS ALLUVIUM, AT PLACES 20,000 FEET DEEP

Alluvium Landslide Anorthosite Mudstone Argillite Quart Monzonite Basalt Rhyolite Gabbro Sandstone Gneiss Schist Granite Faults Granodiorite

Source: California Geologic Map Data, USGS, 2005

22 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS GROUND WATER BASINS

Upper Los Angeles River Area Watermaster San Fernando Basin Sylmar Basin Verdugo Basin Eagle Rock Basin Water Replenishment District of Southern California Central Basin Forebay West Coast Basin Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster Main San Gabriel Basin Raymond Basin Management Board: Raymond Basin Under SGMA Process North Central Basin Hollywood Basin (Low Priority) Santa Monica Basin

Source: Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Ground Water Basins, 2014; SGMA, 2016

23 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS DEPTH TO GROUND WATER

High (25 ft)

Low (425 ft)

Source: Adapted from B3 Insight database compilation, https://www.b3insight.com/

24 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS PERMEABLE SURFICIAL GEOLOGY Impermeable Artificial fill (Af) Unknown (Mx) Older Quaternary deposits fine (Qof) Older Quaternary deposits medium (Qom) Younger Quaternary deposits fine (Qyf) Tertiary aged sediments (Ts) Tertiary aged sediments (Ts+Tv) Tertiary aged sediments (Tv)

Permeable Older Quaternary deposits coarse (Qoc) Older Quaternary deposits very coarse (Qovc) Younger Quaternary deposits coarse (Qyc) Younger Quaternary deposits medium (Qym) Younger Quaternary deposits very coarse (Qyvc) Source: “Stormwater Recharge Feasibility and Pilot Project Development Study report” (SWRechargeFeasibility and PPDS_FinalReport.pdf)

25 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS MOST OF THE LA RIVER HAS TUJUNGA FINE SANDY LOAM SOIL

Altamont Clay Loam Antelope Valley Chino Silt Loam Ramona Sandy Loam Diablo Clay Loam Santa Clara River Hanford Fine Sandy Loam Santa Monica Mountains Hanford Gravelly Sandy Loam Tujunga Fine Sandy Loam Hanford Silt Loam Upper Los Angeles River Little Rock Creek Upper San Gabriel River Montezuma Clay Adobe Yolo Clay Loam Oakley Fine Sand Yolo Fine Sandy Loam Placentia Loam Yolo Gravelly Sandy Loam Ramona Clay Loam Yolo Loam Ramona Loam Yolo Sandy Loam

Source: Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Soil Types, 2004

26 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY: SOILS ACCEPT WATER AT VARYING RATES

Hydrologic Soil Group Class A (Ksat > 1.42 in/hr) Class B (0.57 in/hr < Ksat ≤ 1.42 in/hr) Class C (0.06 in/hr < Ksat ≤ 0.57 in/hr) Class D (Ksat ≤ 0.06 in/hr) Not Available

Source: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey, 2018

27 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RECHARGE PATHWAYS VARY

Confined Aquifer Unconfined Aquifer

Source: Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Ground Water Basins, 2014

28 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RECHARGE: SURFACE SPREADING VS INJECTION

Geophysical Categories Category A - Most Conducive to Recharge Category B - Somewhat Conducive to Recharge Category C - Least Conducive to Recharge

Source: Geosyntec

29 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE LA RIVER

Source: Pigeons in the Los Angeles River on a pigeon ranch, ca.1900; University of Southern California. Libraries & California Historical Society

30 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 1877 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprint 1877

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

31 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 1907 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprint 1877 1907

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

32 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 1937 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprint 1877 1907 1937

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

33 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 1950 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprint 1877 1907 1937 1950

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

34 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 1970 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprint 1877 1907 1937 1950 1970

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

35 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 2010 URBAN FOOTPRINT

Historical Urban Footprints 1877 1907 1937 1950 1970 2010

Source: Angel, S., J. Parent, D. L. Civco and A. M. Blei, 2010. Atlas of Urban Expansion, Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy

36 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS ALL BUT 3 MILES OF THE RIVER CORRIDOR ARE DEVELOPED

Developed Land Cover of the LA River Watershed 2001 2006 2011 Developed, Open Space 11.1% 10.7% 10.4% - Developed, Low Intensity 16.3% 15.9% 15.8% - Developed, Medium Intensity 25.4% 26.0% 26.3% + Developed, High Intensity 8.6% 9.0% 9.2% +

Source: National Land Cover Database 2011

37 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 2,425 IMPERVIOUS ACRES ADDED TO THE WATERSHED BETWEEN 2006 AND 2011.

Percent Change in Imperviousness 100%

Source: Xian, G., Homer, C., Dewitz, J., Fry, J., Hossain, N., and Wickham, J., 2011. The change of impervious surface area between 2001 and 2006 in the conterminous United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, Vol. 77(8): 758-762.

38 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS VEGETATION

Source:KCET Departures, South L.A. - Willow Street, 2010, https://www.flickr.com/photos/kcetdepartures/5057065201/

39 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS LA RIVER WATERSHED HISTORIC VEGETATION FORMATIONS

Coastal sagebrush 53.6% Mixed hardwood forest 13.2% Southern oak forest 15.7% Chaparral 11.4% Coulter pine forest 5.5% Southern jeffrey pine forest 0.4% Coastal saltmash 0.1%

Source: Traced from Kuchler, Natural Vegetation of California, https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~304086~90074713:Natural-Vegetation-of-California-#, 1977

40 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 56% OF THE LA RIVER WATERSHED HAS EXTANT VEGETATION

Urban 53.9% Shrub 31.0% Hardwood Forest/Woodland 4.9% Mixed Conifer and Hardwood Forest/Woodland 4.1% Herbaceous 3.9% Barren 1.4% Conifer Forest/Woodland 0.4%

Source: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, 2011

41 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER WATERSHED HAS 15 EXTANT HABITAT TYPES

Herbaceous-Dominated Habitats Shrub-Dominated Habitats Emergent Wetland Desert Scrub, Shrub, and Wash Grassland Chaparral, Sage, and Brush Tree-Dominated Habitats Other Aspen and Eucalyptus Barren Oak Woodland Montane Woodland Montane Riparian Coniferous and Evergreen Woodland Valley Foothill Riparian

Source: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, FRID 2017, South Coast, Calveg Zone 7

42 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HABITAT TYPES OF THE LA RIVER CORRIDOR Terrestrial Habitats

Coastal Sage Scrub (Soft Chaparral) Chaparral at higher elevations transitioning to Coastal Sage Scrub along the river corridor.

Grassland Native grasses and wildlfowers common to the dense and clayey soils of the Los Angeles Plain.

Valley Oak and Walnut Woodland Open Oak or Walnut woodlands common in canyons and on lower southern slopes from the Glendale Narrows to the western end of the San Fernando Valley. Riparian Forest Lowland forest of Willows, Cottonwoods, and Sycamores with a dense understory of shrubs and vines.

Source: Based on: Harold Mooney and Erika Zavaleta, “Ecosystems of California: Threats and Responses”, University of California Press, 2016 & Kimball L. Garret, “The Biota of the Los Angeles River”, 1993 & Paul M. Schiffman “The Los Angeles Prarie, from “Land of Sunshine: An Environmental History of Metropolitan Los Angeles, by William Deverell and Greg Hise, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2014

43 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HABITAT TYPES OF THE LA RIVER CORRIDOR Aquatic Habitats Freshwater Wetlands Once common to lowland portions of the river, wetlands were dominated by Cattail and Bulrush.

Coastal Salt Marsh Historically extensive at the brackish mouth of the Los Angeles River, dominated by pickleweed and salt-tolerant succulents.

Algae Associated with shallow hard-bottom portions of the river, now common to shallow wet portions of the concrete channel.

Invasives and Non-natives Common to the soft bottom, includes: Arundo, Canary isle palm, Jubata, Mexican fan palm, Pampas, and a variety of Ornamentals.

Source: Kimball L. Garrett, “The Biota of the Los Angeles River”, 1993 & Paul M. Schiffman “The Los Angeles Prarie, from “Land of Sunshine: An Environmental History of Metropolitan Los Angeles, by William Deverell and Greg Hise, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2014 & State of California, Invasive Plants (Species) - Central and So. Cal Coastal Watersheds [ds645], 2009

44 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS INVASIVE SPECIES ARE COMMON IN THE SOFT BOTTOM PORTIONS OF THE LA RIVER CORRIDOR

Arundo (Arundo donax) Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis) Jubata (Cortaderia jubata) Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta) Pampas (Cortaderia selloana) LA River Corridor Hotspot

Source: State of California, Invasive Plants (Species) - Central and So. Cal Coastal Watersheds [ds645], 2010

45 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS URBAN CANOPY

Source: OLIN

46 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA AREA SAW A 1.2% DECREASE YEAR-TO-YEAR IN ITS URBAN SHRUB AND TREE CANOPY FROM 2000-2009

High

Low

Source: Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Tree Canopy 2006 & Su Jin Lee, Travis Longcore, Catherine Rich, and John P. Wilson, “Increased home size and hardscape decreases urban forest cover in Los Angeles County’s single-family residential neighborhoods”, 2017

47 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS DIRECTLY ALONG THE LA RIVER CORRIDOR

Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Arroyo (arroyo southwestern) toad Braunton’s milk-vetch California red-legged frog Coastal California gnatcatcher Lyon’s pentachaeta Palos Verdes blue butterfly Santa Ana sucker Southwestern willow flycatcher Western Snowy Plover Steelhead trout

Source: US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018 & Los Angeles County GIS Data Portal, Significant Ecological Areas, 2015

48 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS 132 RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES NEAR THE RIVER

California brown pelican California least tern Brown-crowned night heron Monarch butterfly

Salt marsh birds beak American badger Nevin’s barberry Southern California legless lizard

Pacific pocket mouse Arroyo toad Southwestern willow flycatcher Bell’s vireo

Source: California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Diversity Database, October 2016; Quads: Burbank, Canoga Park, Hollywood, Long Beach, Los Angeles, South Gate, and Van Nuys, Accessed from CNDDB QuickView, 05/19/18

49 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Amphibians SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Anaxyrus californicus arroyo toad Endangered None Species of Special Concern Rana draytonii California red-legged frog Threatened None Species of Special Concern Spea hammondii western spadefoot None None Species of Special Concern Taricha torosa Coast Range newt None None Species of Special Concern Birds SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Accipiter gentilis northern goshawk None None Species of Special Concern Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird None Candidate Endangered Species of Special Concern Aimophila ruficeps canescens southern California rufous-crowned sparrow None None Watch List Ammodramus savannarum grasshopper sparrow None None Species of Special Concern Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle None None Fully Protected, Watch List Ardea alba great egret None None None Ardea herodias great blue heron None None None Asio otus long-eared owl None None Species of Special Concern Athene cunicularia burrowing owl None None Species of Special Concern Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk None Threatened None Calypte costae Costa's hummingbird None None None Cardinalis cardinalis northern cardinal None None Watch List Charadrius montanus mountain plover None None Species of Special Concern Coccyzus americanus occidentalis western yellow-billed cuckoo Threatened Endangered None Coturnicops noveboracensis yellow rail None None Species of Special Concern Egretta thula snowy egret None None None Empidonax traillii willow flycatcher None Endangered None Empidonax traillii extimus southwestern willow flycatcher Endangered Endangered None

50 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Birds (continued) Falco columbarius merlin None None Watch List Falco mexicanus prairie falcon None None Watch List Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon Delisted Delisted Fully Protected Grus canadensis canadensis lesser sandhill crane None None Species of Special Concern Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Delisted Endangered Fully Protected Icteria virens yellow-breasted chat None None Species of Special Concern Larus californicus California gull None None Watch List Nycticorax nycticorax black-crowned night heron None None None Pandion haliaetus osprey None None Watch List Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi Belding's savannah sparrow None Endangered None Passerculus sandwichensis rostratus large-billed savannah sparrow None None Species of Special Concern Pelecanus occidentalis californicus California brown pelican Delisted Delisted Fully Protected Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant None None Watch List Phoebastria albatrus short-tailed albatross Endangered None Species of Special Concern Piranga rubra summer tanager None None Species of Special Concern Polioptila californica californica coastal California gnatcatcher Threatened None Species of Special Concern Progne subis purple martin None None Species of Special Concern Pyrocephalus rubinus vermilion flycatcher None None Species of Special Concern Riparia riparia bank swallow None Threatened None Selasphorus rufus rufous hummingbird None None None Setophaga petechia yellow warbler None None Species of Special Concern Spinus lawrencei Lawrence's goldfinch None None None Spizella breweri Brewer's sparrow None None None Sternula antillarum browni California least tern Endangered Endangered Fully Protected Vireo bellii pusillus least Bell's vireo Endangered Endangered None Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus yellow-headed blackbird None None Species of Special Concern

51 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Insects SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Bombus crotchii Crotch bumble bee None None None Carolella busckana Busck's gallmoth None None None Cicindela gabbii western tidal-flat tiger beetle None None None Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle None None None Cicindela latesignata latesignata western beach tiger beetle None None None Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population None None None Rhaphiomidas terminatus terminatus El Segundo flower-loving fly None None None Mammals SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None None Species of Special Concern Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat None None Species of Special Concern Lasionycteris noctivagans silver-haired bat None None None Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat None None None Lasiurus xanthinus western yellow bat None None Species of Special Concern Microtus californicus stephensi south coast marsh vole None None Species of Special Concern Myotis velifer cave myotis None None Species of Special Concern Neotoma lepida intermedia San Diego desert woodrat None None Species of Special Concern Nyctinomops macrotis big free-tailed bat None None Species of Special Concern Onychomys torridus ramona southern grasshopper mouse None None Species of Special Concern Perognathus longimembris brevinasus Los Angeles pocket mouse None None Species of Special Concern Perognathus longimembris pacificus Pacific pocket mouse Endangered None Species of Special Concern Taxidea taxus American badger None None Species of Special Concern Mollusks SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Anodonta californiensis California floater None None None Gonidea angulata western ridged mussel None None None

52 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Reptiles SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS CDFW STATUS Anniella sp. California legless lizard None None Species of Special Concern Anniella stebbinsi southern California legless lizard None None Species of Special Concern Arizona elegans occidentalis California glossy snake None None Species of Special Concern Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri coastal whiptail None None Species of Special Concern Diadophis punctatus modestus San Bernardino ringneck snake None None None Emys marmorata western pond turtle None None Species of Special Concern Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard None None Species of Special Concern Salvadora hexalepis virgultea coast patch-nosed snake None None Species of Special Concern Thamnophis hammondii two-striped gartersnake None None Species of Special Concern Thamnophis sirtalis ssp. south coast gartersnake None None Species of Special Concern

Terrestrial Communities SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME FEDERAL STATUS STATE STATUS GLOBAL RANK STATE RANK California Walnut Woodland California Walnut Woodland None None G2 S2.1 Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub None None G1 S1.1 Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest None None G4 S4 Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest None None G3 S3.2 Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland None None G4 S4 Walnut Forest Walnut Forest None None G1 S1.1

53 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Plants SCIENTIFIC_NAME COMMON_NAME FEDERAL_STATUS STATE_STATUS CNPS RARE PLANT RANKING Arenaria paludicola marsh sandwort Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Astragalus brauntonii Braunton's milk-vetch Endangered None 1B.1 Atriplex coulteri Coulter's saltbush None None 1B.2 Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale None None 1B.1 Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii Davidson's saltscale None None 1B.2 Berberis nevinii Nevin's barberry Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Calochortus catalinae Catalina mariposa-lily None None 4.2 Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis slender mariposa-lily None None 1B.2 Calochortus plummerae Plummer's mariposa-lily None None 4.2 Calystegia felix lucky morning-glory None None 1B.1 Camissoniopsis lewisii Lewis' evening-primrose None None 3 Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant None None 1B.1 Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's-beak Endangered Endangered 1B.2 Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina San Fernando Valley spineflower Proposed Threatened Endangered 1B.1 Clinopodium mimuloides monkey-flower savory None None 4.2 Convolvulus simulans small-flowered morning-glory None None 4.2 Deinandra minthornii Santa Susana tarplant None Rare 1B.2 Dodecahema leptoceras slender-horned spineflower Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae Blochman's dudleya None None 1B.1 Dudleya multicaulis many-stemmed dudleya None None 1B.2 Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii Los Angeles sunflower None None 1A Hordeum intercedens vernal barley None None 3.2 Horkelia cuneata var. puberula mesa horkelia None None 1B.1 Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens decumbent goldenbush None None 1B.2

54 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS RARE AND THREATENED SPECIES Plants (continued) Juglans californica southern California black walnut None None 4.2 Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii southwestern spiny rush None None 4.2 Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields None None 1B.1 Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii Robinson's pepper-grass None None 4.3 Lilium humboldtii ssp. ocellatum ocellated humboldt lily None None 4.2 Malacothamnus davidsonii Davidson's bush-mallow None None 1B.2 Monardella hypoleuca ssp. hypoleuca white-veined monardella None None 1B.3 Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress Endangered Threatened 1B.1 Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia None None 1B.1 Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly-heads None None 1B.2 Orcuttia californica California Orcutt grass Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Pentachaeta lyonii Lyon's pentachaeta Endangered Endangered 1B.1 Phacelia hubbyi Hubby's phacelia None None 4.2 Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia None None 1B.1 Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum white rabbit-tobacco None None 2B.2 Quercus durata var. gabrielensis San Gabriel oak None None 4.2 Ribes divaricatum var. parishii Parish's gooseberry None None 1A Sidalcea neomexicana salt spring checkerbloom None None 2B.2 Suaeda esteroa estuary seablite None None 1B.2 Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster None None 1B.2 Symphyotrichum greatae Greata's aster None None 1B.3

55 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER WILDLIFE CAMERA PROJECT

“The LA River is a corridor between big tracts of parkland and the city. Its western headwaters, Caballero Creek, Arroyo Calabasas and Bell Creek, all start in the Santa Monica Mountains.” -David Szymanski, Superintendent of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (SMMNRA) 13 Areas Designated for Placement of 39 Cameras Source: National Park Service, 2018, http://www.malibusurfsidenews.com/news-community/nps-installs- new-motion-activated-cameras-understand-santa-monica-mountain-wildlife, Accessed 05-17-18

Source: National Park Service, Flickr Album: LA River Wildlife Photos, 2016

56 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS SPECIES OBSERVATION IN THE LA RIVER WATERSHED

Unclassified Fish Amphibian Animal (unknown) Spider Bird Algae Fungus Insect Mammal Mollusk Protozoa Reptile

Source: iNaturalist.org, accessed 18 April 2018

57 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS SPECIES OBSERVATIONS WITHIN 1 MILE OF LA RIVER

Reptiles Protozoa Mollusks Mammal Insects Fungus Algae Birds Spider Unknown Amphibian Fish Unclassified Composite

Canoga Park 51 51 50 49 48 Reseda 47 47 46 45 Van Nuys 44 44 43 42 Sherman Oaks 41 41 40 39 38 Studio City 37 37 36 35 34 Burbank 33 33 32 Glendale 31 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 Downtown LA 22 22 21 20 19 Vernon 18 18 17 16 15 Bell Gardens 14 14 13 South Gate 12 12 11 10 Compton 9 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Long Beach 0 0 Source: iNaturalist.org, accessed 18 April 2018

58 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HISTORIC HYDROLOGY OF THE LA RIVER

Source: University of Southern California. Libraries & California Historical Society , Aerial view of the flooded Los Angeles River at the Barham Boulevard bridge, 1938

59 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HISTORIC HYDROLOGY OF THE LA RIVER

Source: University of Southern California. Libraries & California Historical Society , Farmland and the Los Angeles River looking north from Elysian Park toward Mount Washington, 1895-1915

60 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HISTORIC TOPOGRAPHY (1880)

Source: William Hammond, Los Angeles & San Bernardino Topography, 1880

61 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HISTORIC WETLAND ECOLOGY (1870)

Historic Wetlands Current Wetlands Historic and Current Wetlands Historic Floodplain

Source: Adapted from: Charles Rairdan, 1998. Regional restoration goals for wetland resources in the Greater Los Angeles Drainage Area: A landscape-level comparison of recent historic and current conditions using Geographical Information Systems. Dissertation. UCLA

62 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS HYDRAULIC DESIGN REACHES

Classification M, Mile 47.4 to 51.0 F, Mile 24.5 to 30.3 L, Mile 45.6 to 47.2 E, Mile 19.8 to 23.9 K, Mile 43.4 to 45.4 D, Mile 18.9 to 19.7 J, Mile 37.8 to 42.7 C, Mile 12.8 to 18.8 I, Mile 33.9 to 37.5 B, Mile 3.0 to 11.9 H, Mile 32.0 to 33.8 A, Mile 0.0 to 2.8 G, Mile 31.1 to 31.8 Transition

Source: Geosyntec

63 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS CHANNEL SECTION & SHAPE VARIES

Classification Trapezoidal Rectangular

Source: Geosyntec

64 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS CHANNEL MATERIAL VARIES

Classification Soft Bottom (Earthen) Concrete

Source: Geosyntec

65 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS CHANNEL WIDTH VARIES

Classification Narrow, 55 ft Wide, 585 ft

Source: Geosyntec

66 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS THE LA RIVER IS AN IMPAIRED STREAM WITH 13 POTENTIAL FISH BARRIERS

Stream Impaired Stream Stream Confluence Site Fish Barrier Passage Assessment ! Potential Barrier

Source: CalFish, California Fish Passage Assessment Database, 2017 / California Open Data Portal

67 Ecosystems & Habitat PROGRESS WARM FRESHWATER HABITAT Uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including invertebrates.

Classification Existing Stream/Waterbody Potential Stream/Waterbody

Intermittent Stream/Waterbody Not Designated Stream/Waterbody